The camera seems great, but the pedigree of some images is murky.

Microsoft and Nokia announced the flagship Windows Phone handset, the Nokia Lumia 920, at a press event in New York City on Wednesday. Just like the lack of grounding that plagued the end of the announcement (no pricing, dates, or availability information), the presenters on the show floor were extremely stingy when it came to letting us get our paws on the device. But we got a few touches in.

The yellow and red Lumia 920 both have glossy plastic bodies, while the black uses a matte finish (not quite as rubberized as the Lumia 900). The screens are curved glass, and the top and bottom edges don't have the same taper as the Lumia 900 did.

The Lumia 920 is a bit larger in both directions, to accommodate the slightly larger 4.5-inch screen. While none of the phones shown were final production models, the screen seemed to have poor viewing angles when rotated top to bottom; side-to-side, we saw very little dimming.

We only saw two demos on the show floor, one of which demonstrated the NFC capabilities of various charging and audio accessories for the Lumia 920. All worked as promised: touch the phone to the surface and it either starts charging or pairs automatically with the set of headphones or speaker for music playback.

A second demo for the camera exhibited the low-light capabilities of the camera, with photos taken with flash, without flash on the Lumia 920's PureView camera, and without flash on a competing smartphone camera. The PureView camera's low-light performance did make it much easier to see the subject of the photo as well as her surroundings.

However, with that feature turned on, it was impossible to tell that the photo was taken at night, which was a bit disorienting to us. It also created phantom light sources, as if there were a floodlight shining a few feet in front of the subject. Likewise, the sky was an apocalyptic white, yet seemed to cast no light on the subject.

(Update: the integrity of several of Nokia's demo photos for the Lumia 920 has been called into question. Youssef Sarhan has pointed out that certain photos purportedly taken with the Lumia 920 have some graphic impossibilities, and GSMArena has claimed the park photos above to be suspect, precisely because of the unusual lighting sources we noted. Nokia has already admitted to and apologized for using a simulated demo video for the Lumia 920's image stabilization, but has yet to address the images. We've reached out for comment on this matter.)

Enlarge/ These photos were taken of the same scenario; top, a Lumia 920, bottom, our iPhone 4S.

In a real-life demo, a presenter invited us to take a picture in a dark, enclosed space with our own iPhone 4S, to compare to a shot he took with the Lumia 920. The difference in results was very impressive.

Whatever positive notes the Lumia 920 may have, it still seems like little more than a pipe dream to us without pricing, concrete release dates, or availability info. Microsoft has promised to release this info in the fourth quarter of this year.

The first PureView camera in the Nokia PureView 808 clocked in at a whopping 41 megapixels. But Nokia has been insisting that PureView is not about specific camera hardware or megapixel count; it's about using hardware and software to produce the best possible photographs. The camera in the Lumia 920 may disappoint those who were hoping for another 41 megapixels to oversample, but the Lumia 920 arguably makes up for this with impressive low-light photography. As we are now a developed civilization and spend a good deal of our time indoors, a camera that excels at low light has enormous appeal, particularly for night owls, barflies, and party-goers. It may not grab the same headlines, but it could well be more useful.

Promoted Comments

it was impossible to tell that that photo was taken at night, which was a bit disorienting to us. It also created phantom light sources, like there was a floodlight shining a few feet in front of the subject. Likewise, the sky was an apolcalyptic white, yet seemed to cast no light on the subject.

What you're seeing is the light that's actually present in the scene, probably with some tone-mapping thrown in to even out the contrast. I suspect it's the tone-mapping (functionally similar to 'HDR') that's confusing you.

Quote:

Hopefully this means that trend in "megapixels == betterqualityomg" is finally dying?

I sincerely hope not. As Nokia have shown, there's a lot more you can do with lots of megapixels than creating ridiculously large photos. I still hold out hope that pixel density will reach the point needed for Lightfield cameras to take decent pictures.

Actually, you're both right (in a sense).

Pixel density can actually degrade image quality, if the sensor is tiny. Eventually you get to the point that while you have tons of pixels per inch, those pixels are little more than noise, rather than details. Higher amounts of megapixels become important only when your image sensor is correspondingly larger.

For a phone camera, a balance must be struck. If the size of the sensor is bound to a specific size (which they tend to be, especially in phone cameras), then it's better to cap off at a lower megapixel count and make sure everything else works phenominally. Which I think Nokia realized and is doing.

Think the whole point is that the light in the "lumia" tree in park scene wasn't present in the non lumia shot (this is not certain but seems likely).Reading the blog analysis (and the fact that they faked the videos without the 'simulated' rider) Someone in marketing needs to get fired...

In the UK that OIS advert would almost certainly have fallen foul of our deceptive advertising laws.

Here's the 'competing phone' pic with some exposure boost and moderate tone-mapping:

There's nothing in the shadows except noise, but the areas that got above the noise-floor show the same light distribution as in the Nokia pic. So I think it's genuine.

2010 posts | registered Jun 21, 1999

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

We updated the article a little while ago, but whether the park photos were actually taken with a Lumia 920 has been called into question. We've reached out to Nokia for comment. That said, the photos of the vase were taken as we were standing there, so Nokia isn't fronting entirely about the camera's abilities.

Whatever positive notes the Lumia 920 may have, it still seems like little more than a pipe dream to us without pricing, concrete release dates, or availability info. Microsoft has promised to release this info in the third quarter of this year.

Great phones, not just the camera but overall. I'm glad to see Nokia recovering after the arguably wise move to WP.

It is quite unfortunate that the marketing of one of the best features of 920, its camera, was marred by sloppiness and dishonesty. I have no doubt that the camera is ahead of the competition, but I am disappointed by the cheap methods they used to highlight it.

Just once I'd like to read the comments in a Nokia WP thread where someone doesn't bitch and moan that it doesn't run Android. Why don't you go complain about how the iPhone doesn't run Android either while you're at it?

Just once I'd like to read the comments in a Nokia WP thread where someone doesn't bitch and moan that it doesn't run Android. Why don't you go complain about how the iPhone doesn't run Android either while you're at it?

You can keep asking for this all you want, you aren't going to get it.

Quote:

If I was a Nokia shareholder I would hit them over the head for their deal with the devil that was going all MS.

And being a me-too Android OEM would have solved everything.

That's the thing, they wouldn't be a me-too OEM. They were the biggest handset maker, have the best hardware, have an amazing distribution network, have a couple of cool software assets like their navigation tools. They had the potential to be what Samsung is now. The king of the Android OEMs. Beats the hell out of being the king of the 1% Windows Phone market.

If they price it off contract for $499 or less and its GSM I might get it to replace my iPhone. If its carrier locked and/or carrier exclusive then I'll have to wait.

It's definitely carrier-locked in the US, it only supports AT&T LTE bands. Don't know about elsewhere in the world.

Depends if its like the Galaxy S3, I can buy the International version here in the U.S. unlocked and it will work with AT&T's 3G network just fine via Straight Talk. If I can get an intl version of the 920 I might still be good. If the only option is AT&T contract locked then its a no go. No more contracts for me.

"Whatever positive notes the Lumia 920 may have, it still seems like little more than a pipe dream to us without pricing, concrete release dates, or availability info. Microsoft has promised to release this info in the fourth quarter of this year."

Oh nice! Instead of them saying that the phone will be released around the 4th quarter of this year, they're saying that the INFO for when it will be out and the price will be released in the 4th quarter.

Microsoft and now Nokia are getting good at this. Announcing a product, but not giving any details when it will be released and how much it will cost. I can imagine future presentations like this:

"We're pleased to announce today that the information about price and shipping dates, will be available...(dramatic pause)...this fall!" (thunderous applause).

That 920 is looking rather large and plump. Looks nice other than that.

Jim Z wrote:

Quote:

If I was a Nokia shareholder I would hit them over the head for their deal with the devil that was going all MS.

And being a me-too Android OEM would have solved everything.

You say this as if things could have gone worse for Nokia than they have with the Windows Phone decision. They literally are setting business records for their catastrophic fall.

Things could have gone worse. They could have been a me too OEM and Android and not have all the cash Microsoft is pumping into them.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft's promise of pumping undisclosed amounts of cash into the company while they go through a difficult transition was a major factor. Undergoing that painful transition without said cash infusion may very well have killed them.

This may be the first time a phone manufacturer touted image over megapixels but I doubt it. As mentioned in the comments, Apple didn't tout their pixel count. And in the dedicated camera world we had Foveon sensors (Sigma) fighting pixel count stigma a long time ago. Then, more recently, Canon joined in by reducing the pixel count from the G10 to the G11.

The uneducated consumer still looks at pixel count as a primary factor. I agree image quality should be primary, especially lower noise at higher ISO and reducing various distortions and aberrations.

Megapixels only count when you're trying to print something. For web usage, or small pictures (4x6, 5x8, 8x10) an 8MP sensor will do just fine. It's when you're trying to make a poster of something that you'd need more megapixels, but if you're considering that and not shooting with a DSLR then you're doing it wrong.

That said, PureView's performance in low light and its stability make it an exceptionally good platform. Facebook is the largest "picture sharing" site -- and oddly exactly what my wife and I use it for -- and with the Windows Phone platform and its Facebook tight integration, it's actually ideal for our next phones.

I've seen iOS6 and it's nothing short of underwhelming, so unless the iPhone 5 has massage capabilities, I don't see the hardware alone making the sale. Windows Phone and its improvements however, do make a compelling argument with solid hardware from Nokia.

Things could have gone worse. They could have been a me too OEM and Android and not have all the cash Microsoft is pumping into them.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft's promise of pumping undisclosed amounts of cash into the company while they go through a difficult transition was a major factor. Undergoing that painful transition without said cash infusion may very well have killed them.

Nokia didn't need the cash from MS. They had a lot of cash on hand, although they have been burning through cash for the last 2 years. They could've had an Android device pretty 2 years ago to help slow down the cash burn rate. WP7 certainly hasn't helped with that.They could have been the Samsung of Android, it's hard to say. Do some research.

People are surprised at this? When the 4S came out, I'm pretty sure a few of those photos were not taken with the phone itself. They looked too amazing, particularly the colour saturation in one photo I seem to remember, despite low light and the sun in the background of a beach. But without proof, it's all just hearsay.

Instead of criticising Nokia, try to understand why they did this. Sure the photos might look better than your 4S, but when blown to to advertising proportions and without any particular exaggerations, the improved photo won't stick out to the consumer who takes a glance and decides within seconds whether the improvements are worth the purchase.

Nokia have shot themselves in the foot here by not disclosing pictures were not taken with the camera in question, but it's no different to what many other manufacturers do.

How terrible do actual in-game video games look on tv, compared to your high spec gaming computer. Laughably bad.

Can't wait to get my hands on one of those. I don't mind the thickness and weight but absolutely can't stand the gloss finish. Definitely going for black matte.

Been using my Lumia 800 as my secondary/work phone, with iPhone 4 being the "primary" one. If only, developers show some love for WP8, love to make this my next primary phone.

This is the nice part... WP8 shares a codebase with Windows 8 (Windows RT) and since the ecosystem of Windows is a huge one to get "onto" (far bigger than the iPhone/iPad ecosystem in terms of installed counts), you'll get all the benefits very quickly.

Windows 8 launches in a month, and after that you'll start to see a deluge of apps pouring into the Windows Phone App Store as well as the Windows App Store.

Scroll down to see a behind-the-scenes picture of the photoshoot; you can see a DSLR on the left

I am disappointed in this marketing BS. Which idiot thought it would be a good idea? To be honest, in that picture with the girl by the tree, there's just too much dynamic range for such a camera/lens - it's too good to be true.

While megapixel count is somewhat a useless metric to judge photo quality (its really about the density of the pixels on the sensor), one of things that made the original Pureview sensor interesting was that they went for the super high count and had built in binning of the pixels so that the final 5 - 8 megapixel image could benefit from a higher iso (with accompanying noise) used but with the shrinking down, eliminate the negative of the noise. Hence why some are disappointed this isn't using something similar.

Things could have gone worse. They could have been a me too OEM and Android and not have all the cash Microsoft is pumping into them.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft's promise of pumping undisclosed amounts of cash into the company while they go through a difficult transition was a major factor. Undergoing that painful transition without said cash infusion may very well have killed them.

Nokia didn't need the cash from MS. They had a lot of cash on hand, although they have been burning through cash for the last 2 years. They could've had an Android device pretty 2 years ago to help slow down the cash burn rate. WP7 certainly hasn't helped with that.They could have been the Samsung of Android, it's hard to say. Do some research.

They could have been the Samsung of Android, but they also could have failed in the Android space where people seem to place little value on build quality and instead project phones like the GS III to great sales.

As far as Nokia was concerned, the race to the bottom in Android was already pretty far along. People seemed to be perfectly fine buying phones that felt as solid as credit cards and creaked every time you touched the screen. Why would they enter a market which seemed to not care about their strengths as an OEM?

Microsoft has promised to release this info in the fourth quarter of this year.

MS gets it wrong again. You can't do that! Consumers are not going to wait for your device! You need to announce and then ship.

No no...they announced when they're going to be announcing when it will ship! See, they're confident that consumers will wait...and wait...and wait. Their announcement of when they'll be making the shipping announcement has the consumers in the palm of their hands! Marketing geniuses.

Also this is the first time I've seen a hardware manufacturer care about how its hardware/software work together versus megapixel count. Hopefully this means that trend in "megapixels == betterqualityomg" is finally dying?

Do you read about other flagship phones? The SGS3 and HTC One X both had special camera software for better results.

Also this is the first time I've seen a hardware manufacturer care about how its hardware/software work together versus megapixel count. Hopefully this means that trend in "megapixels == betterqualityomg" is finally dying?

Don't think I've ever seen Apple tout the number of megapixels in their phones. They tout the quality of the image.

That may be simply because (from what I recall) Apple has been generally behind their competitors in pixel-count, it's just to their disadvantage to push for that comparison to be made in the first place (while they can argue for having a better image quality).

Yeah, exactly. And most reviews of previous iPhones noted that the camera was at or near the top of the class. The iPhone 4 was especially praised. When you get to a certain threshold, pixels don't matter as much as the lens used to take the photo or the software used to process it.

Right on. I won't deny that megapixels are part of the equation, but they aren't the defining factor in overall quality. This may be a silly comparison, but I liked thinking of it as running Morrowind in 1080p would somehow make the graphics quality better when there's actually more to account for here.

I guess this is a nice sneak peak. Microsoft and Nokia apparently wanted people to think about them a bit when the iPhone is announced. However, I guess Apple has changed how I feel about such previews. I don't care a whole lot about a phone that won't be available for months yet. I don't know if Windows Phone 8 will appeal to me until I get a better idea of how Windows 8 and Windows 8 RT turn out.

For me a phone has to have a lot of good apps. Windows Phone 8 has the potential to attract developers, but I don't really feel the desire to be an early adopter. Maybe if Microsoft wants to subsidize the price enough that I can buy one without renewing my contract I'd be able to invest a little in trying it out. I don't really want to gamble two year contract and a huge early termination fee on such an unproven platform. Guess I'm getting cautious in my old age.

Nice, so we'll find out latter how it does as a ...phone. Is it's reception better than the others? How about range? Call quality? The phone book?

A lot of that is going to be location-specific, but I can say that the Phone Book is easily the best out of all the mobile OSs. It unifies all of your contacts into a single location and then merges the duplicates across services. So when you want to get someone, you can call them, text them, Facebook them, Tweet them, etc. all from their contact. So however that person prefers to be contacted, you can do them all equally easily.

The colored exteriors look great, but almost everyone slaps a cover on their phone, so whats the point?

Because almost everyone doesn't. Cases are popular, but they're not even close to universal. I don't use one with my Lumia 900, and I don't feel like I need one. Robust phone and all that.

I like seeing iPhones in the giant otterbox defender cases, makes them look so stupid. I put a thin silicon case on my RAZR when I first bought it, now it roams the world naked in it's glorious thin splendor. I understand cases for the clumsy, or for particularly breakable phones, but the phones look so nice it's a shame to hide them away.

If they price it off contract for $499 or less and its GSM I might get it to replace my iPhone. If its carrier locked and/or carrier exclusive then I'll have to wait.

It's definitely carrier-locked in the US, it only supports AT&T LTE bands. Don't know about elsewhere in the world.

Depends if its like the Galaxy S3, I can buy the International version here in the U.S. unlocked and it will work with AT&T's 3G network just fine via Straight Talk. If I can get an intl version of the 920 I might still be good. If the only option is AT&T contract locked then its a no go. No more contracts for me.

Same thing pretty much, I'd pay up to $500 for unlocked version that works on Tmobile 3G frequency. I hate US telco exclusive deals that lock you into 2 year contract, even more i hate ATT with a passion